backtop

Print 42 comment(s) - last by mallums.. on Dec 13 at 4:36 AM

Eric Jones holding Lego block with ProDigits  (Source: Touch Bionics)
Device can cost over $70,000

Most of us take little things like holding a glass or brushing our teeth for granted. For some people who have lost hands or fingers, these tasks can be impossible to accomplish without help or specialized equipment.

A new generation of bionic fingers has been unveiled by a company called Touch Bionics. The company is developing advanced upper-limb bionic technologies and has announced the official launch of its ProDigits bionic finger. ProDigits are the world's first powered bionic solution for people who have lost fingers.

The ProDigits prosthetics are custom built for each application by clinicians to insure that they function ideally for the patient. ProDigits are controlled by using one of two methods. Either myoelectric sensors that register muscle signals from the residual finger or palm can be used or a pressure sensitive switch in the form of a force sensitive resistor or a touchpad can be used to control the fingers. The last approach relies on the remnant of the finger or the tissue surrounding the metacarpal bone to provide the necessary pressure to activate the finger.

One user of the ProDigits prosthetic Michael Bailey said, "Honestly, I had only put it [ProDigits] on for five minutes and I was getting it to work just fine. It feels like it belongs there, like it’s part of me."

The Telegraph reports that the ProDigits device costs between £35,000 and £45,000 and requires no surgery. That works out to roughly $57,000 to $73,000 USD. The chances of patients' insurance actually covering this prosthetic is slim meaning that the ProDigits system will be well out of the reach of most people who could benefit from the technology.

A range of coverings can be chosen by the patient including clear skins and a "livingskin" pattern that is natural looking. ProDigits hope to work with the National Health Service in the future for payments in Europe.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Lame
By CommodoreVic20 on 12/9/2009 12:08:19 PM , Rating: 5
It saddens me to think that the people that would probably need these the most like construction workers, steal mill workers and other dangerous blue collar workers would never be able to afford these after an accident.

Our health care sucks people, admit it, lets just hope we never loose a finger typing here at DT.




RE: Lame
By Sahrin on 12/9/09, Rating: 0
RE: Lame
By SublimeSimplicity on 12/9/09, Rating: -1
RE: Lame
By bigdawg1988 on 12/9/2009 3:11:57 PM , Rating: 5
So they don't do medical research in countries with socialized medicine?


RE: Lame
By bigdawg1988 on 12/9/2009 3:16:02 PM , Rating: 2
Whoops, my bad. You were being sarcastic, right?


RE: Lame
By lightfoot on 12/9/2009 3:31:54 PM , Rating: 2
In the United States, roughly 57% of all research funding is provided by the Federal Government. 3% is provided by non-profit charities. 29% is funded by for-profit medical companies. the remaining 11% is provided by state and local governments.

So yes, even with socialized medicine we would still have medical research, but it would be reduced by roughly 30%.


RE: Lame
By Sahrin on 12/9/2009 6:31:49 PM , Rating: 2
You leave out the part where there is no compulsion to spend the money.

First, government directed research generally sucks (this is admitted by NSF and NIH officals).

Second, rightly or wrongly, without multi-billion dollar corporations and universities and hospitals and independent research facilities (which make their money providing for-profit services to the public) lobbying congress to spend the money, how much of that 57% do you think would be spent?

Hell, the entire F-22 program exists today as a result of lobbying. I love the plane, it is an amazing and unequaled piece of technology - but it exists because Lockheed and DoD lobbied congress and convinced them to spend the money. If there were no Air Force or Lockheed Martin, there would be no money - and therefore no F-22.


RE: Lame
By mallums on 12/13/2009 4:26:21 AM , Rating: 2
I love the F22. But it's a failure. In general, I agree with you, I think, but the F22 is a bad example.

(I think the problems with the F22 can be fixed, but it's cancelled, so, moot point. I think we need an F22-like plane, but they say not, a cheaper, dumber plane is more appropriate for current "defense" needs. [sarcasm] Whatever. [/sarcasm])


RE: Lame
By SublimeSimplicity on 12/9/2009 6:46:22 PM , Rating: 2
They definitly do medical research in countries with socialized medical systems. However it's in the hope that they can sell it to the US population, not to take whatever some government panel deems it's worth.

If you meant government funded research, why would they spend money to research something that would only help someone's standard of living? At the cost of more expenditures.


RE: Lame
By philosofa on 12/10/2009 8:12:48 PM , Rating: 1
The research for this device (and its manufacture) was done in the UK - a country with a socialised health care system. Assuming you're not being sarcastic, your post is actually... just made of awesome and funny wrapped tightly together. Let me guess, you'd be a... republican? Perhaps one who has never had a passport and can't identify Canada on a worldmap - perhaps this could be an example of why you should jsut... try and 'know' more things?

p.s. yes Republicans as a whole can be great people, however those who believe government healthcare involves 'death panels' etc truly do deserve a fair bit of derision.


RE: Lame
By mallums on 12/13/2009 4:33:20 AM , Rating: 2
Uh, excuse me? Death panels exist. Private hospitals and public ones both have them. They are mostly ad hoc committees. My uncle was allowed to die because of the decision of such a committee. (Usually, they are called ethics boards. But they decide life and death.)


RE: Lame
By mallums on 12/13/2009 4:36:03 AM , Rating: 2
Let me make a correction. "Ethics boards" are not ad hoc so much. But still, they exist, and that is what they do.


RE: Lame
By CommodoreVic20 on 12/9/2009 5:23:25 PM , Rating: 3
I suppose your poor level of reading comprehension, arrogance or lack of awareness is probably worse than losing a finger or a hand for that matter.

I never mentioned 'a socialized health care system'. All I said was our system sucks. I do support improvement of our system and I am not necessarily behind any proposals.

I think French and British hourly and millionaire amputees are beyond any scope of my original comment. I surprised your rant did not go into the JFK conspiracy or the inner workings of the KKK.


RE: Lame
By Sahrin on 12/9/09, Rating: -1
RE: Lame
By Insomniator on 12/9/09, Rating: 0
RE: Lame
By ChoreBoy on 12/9/2009 1:15:24 PM , Rating: 2
give one of these "hands" or "fingers" to a construction worker, let him whack it with a hammer a couple times as he pounds a nail, see what happens. real fingers hold up much better. especially when it's time to wash your hands at the end of the day.


RE: Lame
By kkshoe1210 on 12/9/09, Rating: -1
RE: Lame
By intelpatriot on 12/10/2009 5:50:28 AM , Rating: 2
There are probably a lot less construction workers etc with missing fingers in countries with so-called "socialised" health systems,

because they won't have been asked "how many fingers can you afford to save?" at the time of their accident.

It is only in the United States (out of the advanced economies) that people suffer amputation because they are unable to afford the alternatives.


"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer









botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki